I've never made a point to remove cold break, it has pretty much taken care of itself using an immersion chiller. That said, I shut the ball valve off as the drain starts to pick it up, thereby leaving a very small amount of wort behind in the BK. I've always been willing to sacrifice a few ounces of wort to keep the gunk out. I suppose that is why as I transition to a CFC, I'm inclined to still keep it out of the fermenter, though apparently any concerns are unjustified.

It provides yeast nutrients and it's all left behind when the beer is racked to secondary and/or the serving keg or bottling bucket. Almost no commercial breweries do a separate cold break/trub removal step.

SOP for many commercial breweries is to whirlpool prior to chilling then chilling with a plate chiller. Much of the trub settles out in the whirlpool but I don't think the cold break would since the wort has not yet been chilled.

So, I think many commercial breweries end up with cold break in the fermenter...

On the positive side, like Bills indicates cloudy wort has been shown to ofte lead to more vigorous fermentations indicating more happy yeast. (note though, that this doesn't necessarily mean it gets more tasty)

I read a paper on that not too long ago, and to make a long story short: The conclusion was that the two most significant single reasons why cloudy wort make a more vigorous fermentation was

2) cloudy wort gets a lower level of supersaturation by acting as nucleation sites (in effect "lowering the CO2 headpressure"), stimulating yeast growth. This was confirmed by instead of trub, having similarly sized suspended solids, that did the same job nucleationwise.

On the flavour formation side it gets more complex though, but there are most ceratinly some effects there too, but none I can see that qualifies for considering removal "essential".

Another possibility is how the break material reacts of the acidification that occurs during fermentation. Perhaps the longer exposure of break material in wort may have some subtle effects as well.

Cold break removal is a byproduct of my chilling process. (throw warm/hot wort in bottling bucket and throw bottling bucket into fermentation fridge over night....next day open spigot and let drain into fermenter.....very clear wort)

I can tell you that without a doubt to my taste I have not noticed any difference. To my eye I have seen not increase in clarity. To my hydrometer (if I take a measurement) I have seen no change in my FGs.

I remove it much in the same manner as dhacker. I generally re-use my primary fermentors (6.7 g. carboys) several times by racking the finished (fermented) beer out, then racking newly brewed wort onto the existing yeast cake, without cleaning the carboys. So for my brewing process, the primary reason for cold break removal is to prevent the build-up of “stuff” other than yeast in the primary fermentors.

After chilling, I dump the contents of my kettle into a fermenter. Wort, cold break, hot break, hop crud, perhaps leaves and bugs on a windy day -- it all goes in.

I used to let things settle after chilling (I use an IC) and try to pour off just the clear wort. That's because I used to reuse my yeast a lot and wanted it fairly clean. But I stopped when I stopped reusing yeast so much. Like Doug, I have found absolutely zero difference in the finished beer with the two methods."Vime's approach to paperwork was not to touch it until someone was shouting, and then at least there would be someone to help him sort through the stacks." -- Terry Pratchett

"....It is widely believed that removing all cold trub not only has no benefit, but actually might slow fermentation and harm the finished beer, reportedly giving it an onion-like flavor. Stroh Brewing Co. reported slower fermentation, higher acetate ester levels, and lower yeast growth and viability after removing all cold trub from test batches (6). Further experiments showed another effect of the complete elimination of trub: the absence of nucleation sites during fermentation resulted in a supersaturation of carbon dioxide in the wort; high levels dissolved carbon dioxide inhibit fermentation. Stroh's work revealed the importance of having at least some wort solids present to act as carbon dioxide nucleation sites.

Removing at least some cold trub, however, has been shown to improve yeast viability and the quality of finished beers...."

According this article you have a tie, both parties were slightly correct in their assumptions.

I have read that it is much more important to remove break material from paler beers, especially lagers, than from ales in general. Having never done a side-by-side (and never intending to), I cannot personally endorse the admonitions to do so.

I have attempted several times to allow my wort to settle in one carboy, then racking above the break material into another. I usually end up creating a big mess, losing wort, and greatly increasing the chances of infection by mucking around with the wort when it was probably better left alone.

As someone said above, I like my beers. They generally ferment out, they're clear, and they taste good. Maybe I'm falling into a rut, but I fail to see a big reason to monkey with success.

I use an immersion chiller and leave a little bit of the muck (trub, cold break, hops, etc) in my brewpot. I dont worry about anything that makes it to primary from there as I rack to secondary in 1-2 weeks. Anyway, I recently ordered (yeah, I was too lazy to make one from a washer hose) a bazooka screen. I am not sure if that will help much but I have started brewing with hop plugs instead of pellets and the screen and hops should form a pretty nice natural filter.

I use an immerssion chiller, whirlpool after the wort is cool with a sanitized spoon (of course) and then transfer to the Fermenter. If there is enough wort to leave trub behind in the kettle, great. If not it goes in the fermenter. I rack to secondary within a week for ales, 10-days for lagers.